Total Posts: 863
Joined 2011-11-04
The first Presidential candidate that I ever voted for was Richard Nixon. And I voted for him, specifically because I thought his opponent, McGovern, was “wishy washy” and I didn’t want a President who could not stand by his decisions. Terms like “wishy washy” and “flip flopper” are inadequate to describe Romney’s level of duplicity.

Interesting Tim, Nixon was the first candidate I voted against! I backed McGovern for his opposition to the Vietnam War and his bill to limit defense spending. I found him anything but wishy-washy though. For instance, he stood before the entire Senate and denounced them for sending in our troops to be killed and maimed making this the “rich man’s war and a poor man’s fight”. But today he would be viewed as a conservative due to his economic stance. This plus the fact that his running mate had been institutionalized temporarily, lost him the election but I do agree that Romney is the poster child of duplicity.

Cap’t Jack

If McGovern had stood by his choice of Eagleton for VP, as he said he would, when the info first came out about Eagleton’s history of having had ECT for depression, I would have voted for him. But McGovern, did not. Thus, in my mind, he confirmed the label of wishy washy.

In retrospect, (with our benefit of hindsight of Tricky Dicky), I must commend your voting for McGovern over Nixon, but not vetting your VP candidate, properly, does say something about a Presidential candidate’s fitness to be President, as was the case, recently, with the last Republican nominee for President.

Signature

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.